Butch

1\2 h bar then... Yes, it is a measurement of energy. Yes, I am only looking at the interaction between them! How excellent, if you get it, I must be thinking correctly! Now, if we add energy to a fermion and it relaxes back to 1\2 h bar and shakes the field in doing so, might that be the emission of a photon?

A bit of progress on my model... Fermions have a spin of 1\2, so I am going to use that as my units. With these units, the fermion will reside at unity ("depth" = 1, "width" = 1)... I may be missing some terminology here, sorry for that. Can you see that two fermions in proximity would produce a "dip" in the field? That would be a gravity well. The permutations in the field to its extents then would be a map of gravitation.

Sometimes getting lost in the woods is just a matter of looking in the wrong direction or making one wrong turn... I believe I have chosen a relatively simple path. It will require study of existing science on my part (The folks I have met here have been invaluable in that respect) familiarity with the standard model is number one on the list at present. This idea I have is not a recent thought, it goes back to 1983... QM has really been an eye opener for me. I have done some study on string theory, it seems like some things I have done as a fisherman... When I need to invent a device, I tend to over complicate things, and in the end find a very much simpler solution. Anyway thx for your post, I hope to hear more from you.

There is something improper about speculation? The dimensions of such a well are yet to be determined, such measurement is not dependant on the "width" or "depth" of the well, but rather the units describing the well, such units bring the well into a relative framework... I was thinking about units relating hbar... So yes, barely a divot, but an important divot. Seems meaningless, maybe so... However a particle with mass has a gravitational well, I have only speculated thus far that fermions and bosons share a common field, with differing manifestations in that field(one as a well and one as a wave packet) your earlier post led me to consider composite bosons and it seems obvious that if that is the case then fermion particles sharing a common field would attract one another because of the lower amplitude of the field between them(should I be speaking tensors?) and of course bosons with mass would produce a well in a different manner. The interaction of the fermions(resulting from inertia and exclusion) would create an oscillating perturbation in the field(a wave). Now let us stretch things a bit(I am just beginning to consider this). The interactions just mentioned could in some way produce charge... Yeah, don't have much faith in that one, just going to put it on a back shelf for now... So there you go, is it really such a strange concept that fermions, bosons and gravity share the same field? Is it such an outrageous concept that I should not waste more of my time investigating?

Elaborate? Possibly this discussion could be moved to speculations?

Indeed bosons could create a well, but it would be a gravity well in the fermion field... The boson excitation would be a wave perturbation of the fermion field, but certainly even that could produce a well of sorts ( perhaps the shape of the wave packet). The fermions are the wells in the field, they are not "in" the field. The fermion field is absolute, that is to say it is as "deep" as is possible ( perhaps infinite, a singularity). I am giving some thought to composite bosons, I will need to do some study... Right now I am thinking that because of exclusion, perhaps the fermions interacting produces a wave perturbation in the field, this could even have some relationship to charge. I apologise for how incomplete this is, but please understand your critique guides me. Thank you!

Yes, but was a silly question on my part, if we remove spin, we no longer have a particle.

Spin or momentum?

If bosons are exempt from exclusion, but can have mass... What prevents a massive cascade?

The spin of the particle is the embeddment of the field, note that the "lip" of the well (x=y=1) is a relatively tiny area. This area is the particle proper, hence the measured spin is 1. The "lip" is a very special feature... I do not presently have the words to describe what is special about it, but I am working on it. A particle has energy because it exists, any particle that has mass curves space. Sorry this is not complete, I did not intend to go into it yet, and then I will do it in speculations where it belongs. In the meantime, you all are very helpful. Thank you.

I cannot get my head around this at the moment, I did find information that it is a cubic curve... In the future I will refer to the curve as the plot of the inverse square... Unless you have a better term? No need, it is simply the plot of the inverse square. An interesting aspect of this curve is, if it is plotted with x=0 to infinity, it is a right angle.

Beg your pardon, that of course is not correct... Brb

1/x^1 or 1/x^2 is a function of the angle of the cutting plane.

I must disagree... https://www.wyzant.com/resources/answers/15097/is_there_any_relation_between_y_1_x_graph_and_hyperbola_if_so_than_explain_how

If you would correct my terminology, I would greatly appreciate it! What I have referred to as unity is the point on the hyperbolic curve where x=y, is there a better term?

You confused me! The well is the particle. The well manifests as a particle near unity, that is to say where the slope of the hyperbolic is 45°... It does not get deeper, with a gain of energy the well is distorted, as the well returns to its base state it produces a wave perturbation in the field... A photon perhaps?

Perhaps it does not... Perhaps the unity point changes, not really clear on this yet. I am driven in a direction of thought by the idea that a particle is not a wave phenomenon, but rather it exhibits a wave property when detected... hope that makes sense. I have a looong way to go on this, but you all have been really great teachers. "A fermion can be an elementary particle, such as the electron, or it can be a composite particle, such as the proton. ... Fermions are usually associated with matter, whereas bosons are generally force carrier particles, although in the current state of particle physics the distinction between the two concepts is unclear." https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermion Yeah, I'm feeling that!

I will have to model each beginning with elementary Fermions... and building the others. At least spin math is pretty simple! Thank you Strange.

Good question! Let me investigate, learn and see if I have an answer! Photons do have this effect, but differently! A wave packet in the field would certainly have an effect, however not nearly as greatly as the Fermion. My abstract vision of this is that a photon wave packet traveling through this field could be swallowed up by an electron, the electrons spin would increase momentarily and a photon would be emitted as it fell back, and the result would be a wave packet traveling through the field. All of the Fermion particles and there position would define the "shape" of the field. Bosons would be oscillating perturbations of the field. If a group of Fermions were in close proximity the combined energy of their spin would create a deeper local well.

Yes, most simply a hyperbolic curve representing the distortion of the field by the existence of the particle... this could be a gravitational effect. Only Fermions would have this property, Bosons would be wave packet perturbations of the field.

A gravity well is an xample of an embeddment, If you want to correct my terminology, I would be grateful. The embeddment I am considering for a Fermion would be an infinite well. I am thinking units for y should be particle spin (The depth of the well), x would be distance. With a spin of 1, the particle would reside at unity.

Hydrogen, not a starting point... I am dealing with unbound particles at present. You have been very helpful! The basis of my model regarding Fermions is that they are embedments, this can be functionally plotted as 1/x^2... The units I have decided to try are integer spin... Unity would then be a particle with a spin of 1, however you have stated that Fermions have a spin of 1\2 and Bosons have a spin of 1... In my model Bosons would be a wave perturbation of the field while fermions would be embedments in the field perhaps then 1\2 hbar should be my base unit for plotting? I stand corrected... You stated "fractional" spin values... Are there spin values other than 1\2 for Fermions?

When I have a decent model I will present it in speculations. Thx for the info, I had just been considering spin in my model! I will be getting there in detail soon, I am familiar with Pauli, but certainly I will need to explore in greater depth.

Hey, Strange Just dropping a note to correct some of my terminology... My idea is that a Fermion is embedded while a Boson is a perturbation, however they share a common field. I am making good progress on a model, however I may need some assistance converting some of the abstract to math.

Yes, that is propagation delay. What is the method used to make the most accurate measurement of light speed?